Natasha: lawyers says Akpabio should step aside while testifying

On June 19, 2025, a fresh storm erupted in Nigeria’s political and legal arena as a group of legislative lawyers demanded that Senate President Godswill Akpabio step aside.

From his official duties while testifying in the high-profile defamation trial involving Kogi Central Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan.

According to Daily Post Report, the lawyers have taken their demand to the Federal High Court.

Seeking an Order of Mandamus compelling the Senate to elect.

An Acting President to preside over plenary sessions whenever Akpabio is absent attending court proceedings.

This controversial move stems from the explosive defamation case filed against Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan.

Who stands accused of making damaging allegations against Akpabio and former Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello.

The case which has captured national attention.

Accuses the suspended senator of claiming that Akpabio and Bello conspired to orchestrate her assassination a charge she vehemently denies.

The lawyers, operating under the Association of Legislative Drafting and Advocacy Practitioners (ALDRAP).

Anchored their demand on Order 22 of the Senate Standing Rules, 2023.

This order clearly states that in the absence of both the Senate President and Deputy Senate President.

The Senate must elect a President pro-tempore to preside over plenary.

ALDRAP insists that Akpabio’s court appearances as a prosecution witness necessitate his temporary stepping aside to uphold the integrity of the Senate’s operations.

In a pre-action notice dated June 17, 2025, and signed by ALDRAP’s administrative secretary, Jesse Williams.

The Senate President was formally notified of the lawyers’ intention to seek judicial enforcement of the standing order.

The letter warned that failure to comply within 48 hours would trigger litigation and possibly calls for Akpabio’s recall, given the trial’s scheduled commencement on September 23, 2024.

The defamation charges against Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan are serious and politically charged.

Filed by the Director of Public Prosecutions on behalf of the Federal Government.

The three-count charge alleges that Natasha knowingly made false imputations.

During a live television interview and other public forums, linking Akpabio and Bello to plots against her life.

The allegations include a shocking claim that Akpabio was involved in the killing of a young Uyo job seeker.

Miss Umoren Iniobong, by using her internal organs for his ailing wife a claim that has sent ripples of disbelief and outrage across the nation.

Akpabio is listed as the “nominal complainant” and a key prosecution witness in the trial.

Other witnesses include Yahaya Bello, Senator Asuquo Ekpenyong, and officials from the Nigeria Police Force’s IGP Monitoring Unit.

The trial is set to begin on September 23, 2024, and is expected to be a courtroom spectacle given the high-profile personalities involved.

The court proceedings on June 19 saw Natasha plead not guilty to all charges before Justice Chizoba Orji of the Federal Capital Territory High Court in Abuja.

The bail decision sparked mixed reactions, with the prosecution urging her remand due to fears that she might interfere with the investigations.

Her defense argued that she poses no flight risk and deserves the presumption of innocence.

The demand for Akpabio to step aside while testifying has stirred intense debate

Supporters of the move argue that it is a necessary step to prevent conflicts of interest.

And maintain the Senate’s dignity during a politically sensitive trial.

They contend that Akpabio’s dual role as Senate President and prosecution witness compromises the impartiality expected of his office and distracts from legislative duties.

Critics, however, view the demand as a politically motivated attempt to undermine Akpabio’s authority.

And destabilize the Senate’s leadership.

Some accuse Natasha’s legal team and their allies of using the courts to wage a proxy battle against Akpabio.

They allege that political forces engineered the defamation charges to silence dissent and weaken opposition voices within the National Assembly.

The unfolding drama has also raised questions about the broader implications for Nigeria’s legislative processes.

If the court compels Akpabio to step aside, it would set a precedent for how lawmakers involved in legal battles are expected to balance their official responsibilities with court appearances.

It also spotlights the tension between Nigeria’s judiciary and legislature,

With potential clashes over separation of powers and institutional autonomy.

Meanwhile, the public watches closely as this high-stakes legal and political battle unfolds. 

Natasha’s supporters, including civil society activists and prominent figures like former Education Minister Obiageli Ezekwesili, have rallied around her

Framing the trial as a fight against political intimidation and injustice. 

Akpabio’s camp insists that the law must take its course and defends the Senate President’s reputation against baseless attacks.

As the September trial date looms, all eyes remain on the Federal High Court and the Senate. 

Will Akpabio heed the call to step aside, or will he resist what some see as an attempt to weaken his grip on power? 

And will Natasha’s defamation trial expose deeper political rifts within Nigeria’s corridors of power?

One thing is certain:

This case has become more than a legal dispute. 

It is a battleground for political influence, institutional integrity, and the rule of law in Nigeria’s fragile democracy. 

The coming months promise to be a rollercoaster of courtroom drama, political intrigue, and public debate one that Wahalaupdate will be following closely.